Habitat Patch Arrangement and Metapopulation Persistence of Predators and Prey

By M. Holyoak. American Naturalist, 2000

115 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/71dc9e14be0d999d1cca192570f6c23a3300e9c7

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Modelling long‐distance seed dispersal in heterogeneous landscapes (2008, unknown): “Still, a common constraint often remains for plant ecologists: landscapes are either too small to have direct application to the scale at which seed dispersal occurs (Gonzalez et al . 1998; Holyoak 2000; Hoyle 2007) or too large to be well replicated or to allow experimental manipulation (Debinski &”
MATRIX HETEROGENEITY AND HOST–PARASITOID INTERACTIONS IN SPACE (2003, background): “Increased patch connectivity due to this change in matrix composition is predicted to lead to high spatial synchrony, low host abundances, and low interaction persistence at a regional scale (Holyoak and Lawler 1996, Harrison and Taylor 1997, Holyoak 2000, Nachman 2001).”
SPATIAL ECOLOGY OF PREDATOR–PREY INTERACTIONS: CORRIDORS AND PATCH SHAPE INFLUENCE SEED PREDATION (2003, background): “Empirical work in microcosms reveals that corridors can affect persistence of predator–prey systems (Holyoak and Lawler 1996), but also warns that connecting patches can sometimes lead to counterintuitive outcomes (Burkey 1997, Holyoak 2000).”
EFFECTS OF SUCCESSIONAL DYNAMICS ON METAPOPULATION PERSISTENCE (2003, background): “…structure has been shown to extend the persistence of experimental exploiter–victim systems, but again only a few studies have confirmed that persistence occurs through the classical metapopulation scenario (van de Klashorst et al. 1992, Holyoak and Lawler 1996, Holyoak 2000, Ellner et al. 2001).”